Get the Word Out. The Formation and Political Impact of Judicial Opinion-Writing

How do courts exercise political power through opinion writing? To understand the influence of courts, most research focuses on judicial decisions' outcomes—whether a plaintiff's referral is upheld or dismissed. This project adopts a broader perspective by examining how the substance and style of opinion writing influence public perception. Judicial opinions can vary significantly in accessibility; some use plain, content-related language, while others rely on technical jargon, making them more difficult for the public to process. Easily accessible opinions are likely to attract broader media coverage, while complex ones may be overlooked. This implies that judges can shape media attention and, consequently, the degree of public awareness of judicial decisions. Public engagement with judicial opinions occurs not only through traditional media but also in discussions on social media.

The goal of this project was to apply both established and novel automated text analysis techniques to map content-related aspects of judicial decisions and link them to public perception. We intended to analyse decisions from the German Federal Constitutional Court, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the French Conseil Constitutionnel. These courts differ in structure, politicization, and decision-making scope, allowing us to compare judicial opinion formation across varied judicial systems.

While we were unable to secure funding to conduct the full project, we carried out two preparatory studies, which were published as separate papers. The first study used citation networks to scale judgments of German lower courts, with a focus on forum shopping (litigants trying to have their case heard in a court that is expected to provide a favourable judgment) and forum selling (a court’s attempt to attract lawsuits). The second study applied manifesto scores of brief authors to place court judgments and political actors within a common policy space. This method was showcased in two quantitative case studies using judgments from the European Court of Justice and the German Federal Constitutional Court.